This site uses cookies to improve your experience. By viewing our content, you are accepting the use of cookies. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country we will assume you are from the United States. View our privacy policy and terms of use.

Remove 2006 Remove Advertising Remove False Advertising Remove Settlement
article thumbnail

TIL: “Texas Tamale” Is an Enforceable Trademark–Texas Tamale v. CPUSA2

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

JUNE 8, 2024

This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. The court said that the trademark owner had been using the trademark since 1985 and registered the trademark in 2006. ” Say what? ” That prompted this litigation. ” UGH.

Trademark 100
Trademark Advertising Advertising False Advertising 100
article thumbnail

Don’t call a Rule 68 judgment in an infringement case an infringement judgment

LexBlog IP

MARCH 17, 2024

Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is structured to motivate defendants to make settlement offers. Here, Crocs sued defendants in 2006. Defendant Diamond Distribution then sued Crocs for defamation, false advertising, and related state torts. The full text of the press release is in the decision (link below).

False Advertising 52
False Advertising Settlement Advertising Advertising 52
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

 

Stay Connected

Join 9,000+ Insiders by signing up for our newsletter

About
About
Editions
Editions
Topics
Powered by Aggregage | Terms and Conditions | Your California Rights and Privacy Policy
© Aggregage 2024